tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post3140979830888639925..comments2024-03-15T11:42:21.265-04:00Comments on The Patry Copyright Blog: US Government Insists on Right to Violate DMCAWilliam Patryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12987498082479617363noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-15090699210962668462009-06-29T05:16:54.379-04:002009-06-29T05:16:54.379-04:00Hey.. been blogging for a while but never ever cam...Hey.. been blogging for a while but never ever came across to your blog. Interesting reading here....<br /><br />LLCBlucas law centerhttp://lucaslawcenterblog.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-31267601541589369452008-08-01T01:54:00.000-04:002008-08-01T01:54:00.000-04:00I find the anti-circumvention claim rather dubious...I find the anti-circumvention claim rather dubious on its face. In order for a technological measure to "effectively control access to a copyrighted work" by the definition of the statute, there must be a process by which otherwise unreadable works are transformed into readable works.<BR/><BR/>If, in this case, the main body of the object code is the copyrighted work and the portion of it which checks the date is the protection mechanism, then that mechanism does not meet the definition of an effective copyright protection mechanism proscribed in the statute. The remaining object code can be read and executed both before and after the date check is executed. The date check code merely instructs the computer to cease running the code. If the object code were encrypted and the date check mechanism also decrypted the code, then that would be another matter. But clearly, it is not an effective copy protection mechanism, either on its face or by the book.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-59433479683483373382008-07-31T13:15:00.000-04:002008-07-31T13:15:00.000-04:00This is a case that is different simply because th...This is a case that is different simply because the "employee" was a service member. Question: When are you "off-duty", Answer: never. I was in the Army and in a special ops unit. We got called at all hours, including ringing phones at 2am. I even once ran off a soccer field in the middle of a match. Even on the weekend, you are subject to any restrictions your commander deems fit for the unit and its mission.<BR/><BR/>Point is that even "on his own time" is a complicating factor in this case. As for the review that was written, the culture on these job performance reviews is such that competent job performance should reflect the members role in saving the world so you have to discount any glowing language in such documents (stating the member is competent translates to "he was napping whenever my boot wasn't connected to his rear").<BR/><BR/>Further, remember in the military, EVERYTHING is viewed in light of national security. The Air Force's thinking is probably one of this now being vital to accomplish smooth management of its personnel without disruption in light of wartime operations.<BR/><BR/>That all being said, giving sovereign immunity to swipe intellectual property WITHOUT JUST COMPENSATION is a dangerous concept. Anybody think the government can stiff the makers of the Humvee? Even the infamous Jeep was taken from a company deemed too small to build its own design in the numbers needed and the design given and contracted to a major car company (Ford originally). But even then, the company was given royalties and compensation for its design.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-40648572262848485202008-07-31T10:41:00.000-04:002008-07-31T10:41:00.000-04:00Dear Mr. Party,Thank you for another interesting p...Dear Mr. Party,<BR/>Thank you for another interesting post. I understand your point about the hypocrisy of the government circumventing the DMCA while simultaneously trying to promote it worldwide. Taking that aside, and taking aside the claim of sovereign immunity. To what extent do employees maintain intellectual property rights over code they write for their work, that is directly related to their work?<BR/><BR/>What are the mitigating factors? Exempt/hourly employee status. Whether the job description includes programming? Where the code was maintained?<BR/><BR/>I work at a university and I know the deal is that faculty share/surrender their intellectual property rights to some degree with the University, regardless of where the actual work is done. But there is a contract that spells this out. I'm suprised there is no similar blanket contract like this for the armed services.planetmcdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00107197218778096498noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-61606140865939684322008-07-30T11:32:00.000-04:002008-07-30T11:32:00.000-04:00Dear Mr. Baumstark, the opinion didn't turn on the...Dear Mr. Baumstark, the opinion didn't turn on the considerations you note, but in any event I don't think they go the issue of whether the work was one that should have been considered a work of the United States. None of the facts support that view. Moreover, testing is something that occurs in the private sector too. The sense I get from the opinion is that Sgt. Davenport was doing what we want developers to do: tailor the product toward customers' needs. But to me, even giving your views full weight, none of that excuses the Air Force's conduct, IMHO.William Patryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12987498082479617363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12505562.post-55859674731483514682008-07-30T11:21:00.000-04:002008-07-30T11:21:00.000-04:00While I appreciate the irony of the government ign...While I appreciate the irony of the government ignoring the DMCA, it can be argued they have some stake in the creation of the AUMD software. While the actual coding was performed by Sgt. Davenport, he received some benefit from the Air Force, in terms of resources and personnel, to test and improve his software. These activities are part of the typical software development cycle and are usually considered as part of the developer's costs (yet Davenport got them, seemingly, as part of his paid service to the Air Force).<BR/><BR/>While the extent of the government's role in the program's development is unclear, it seems misleading for Davenport to imply he did all the work himself.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com